» Articles » PMID: 11137639

Bond Strength of Composite to Dentin Using Conventional, One-step, and Self-etching Adhesive Systems

Overview
Journal J Dent
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2001 Jan 4
PMID 11137639
Citations 27
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: This in vitro study compared the dentin bonding performance of eight adhesive systems using a microtensile bond strength test.

Methods: Thirty bovine teeth were ground to 600-grit to obtain flat root-dentin surfaces. Two conventional adhesive systems (Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus, OptiBond FL), four one-step adhesive systems (Scotchbond 1, Asba S.A.C., Prime and Bond NT, Excite) and two self-etching adhesive materials (Clearfil Liner Bond 2 V and Prompt L-Pop) were evaluated. Each bonding system was applied according to manufacturer's instructions and followed by composite (Z100) application. Immediately after bonding, the teeth were prepared for microtensile testing. Bond strength to dentin was measured using a Vitrodyne V-1000 universal tester. There were 14 replicates for each material. Fractured specimens were further observed by SEM.

Results: Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus exhibited significantly (p<0.05) higher bond strength values (30.3+/-9.4 MPa) than all other materials. The bond strengths of the other materials were (from highest to lowest): Opitbond FL (22.4+/-4.3 MPa); Scotchbond 1(18.9+/-3.2); Clearfil Liner Bond 2 V (18.9+/-3.0); Prime and Bond NT (18.3+/-6.9); Asba S.A.C. (14.4+/-2.9); Excite (13.8+/-3.7); and Prompt L-Pop (9.1+/-3.3). Statistical comparisons frequently overlapped, but Optibond was significantly (p<0.05) greater than Asba, Excite, and Prompt L-Pop; whereas, Scotchbond 1 was only significantly (p<0.05) greater than Prompt L-Pop. Asba, Excite and Prompt L-Pop were not significantly different. The fracture modes were mostly adhesive.

Conclusions: The conventional adhesive systems produced higher bond strengths to root dentin than most one-step adhesives and one self-etching adhesive; with the exception of one material in each respective system.

Citing Articles

Comparative evaluations of shear bond strength of mineral trioxide aggregate, Biodentine, and calcium-enriched mixture to bulk-fill flowable composite using three different adhesive systems: An study.

Fatima A, Iftekhar H, Alam S, Tewari R, Andrabi M J Conserv Dent Endod. 2024; 27(7):706-713.

PMID: 39262590 PMC: 11385902. DOI: 10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_192_24.


Impact of adhesive application errors on dentin bond strength of resin composite.

Scharer B, Peutzfeldt A Biomater Investig Dent. 2022; 9(1):101-109.

PMID: 36389269 PMC: 9648378. DOI: 10.1080/26415275.2022.2138405.


Effect of Dentin-Disinfection Chemicals on Shear Bond Strength and Microhardness of Resin-Infiltrated Human Dentin in Different Adhesive Protocols.

Haralur S, Alqahtani M, Alqahtani R, Shabab R, Hummadi K Medicina (Kaunas). 2022; 58(9).

PMID: 36143921 PMC: 9501625. DOI: 10.3390/medicina58091244.


Comparative Evaluation of Resin Dentin Interface using Universal and Total- Etch Adhesive Systems on Sound and Eroded Dentin: In Vitro Study.

Kanniappan G, Hari P, Jujare R Eur J Dent. 2021; 16(1):153-160.

PMID: 34598293 PMC: 8890932. DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1734469.


Comparative scanning electron microscope analysis of the enamel of permanent human, bovine and porcine teeth.

Olek A, Klimek L, Boltacz-Rzepkowska E J Vet Sci. 2020; 21(6):e83.

PMID: 33263230 PMC: 7710455. DOI: 10.4142/jvs.2020.21.e83.